At least a dozen lawyers in my family (including 6 who have finished law school in the last 5 years). Math, Political Science, Philosophy, English, Comparative Religion… etc. All but one are in corporate law (the philosopher does bankruptcy and restructuring and not a single partner in the group majored in accounting or finance) and the one NOT doing corporate law did so until a month ago (now working in criminal justice). That was the math/statistics major.
You are getting bad advice on law school admissions. Anything which teaches logical thinking and stresses writing, writing and more writing is going to help but no major will keep him out. What list are you looking at?
IDK where I got it, maybe LSAC research or some such. I didn’t mean to imply that there weren’t other majors that precede accounting, only that accounting was a solid major for pre law, since he was already interested in finance, it just made sense. That said, my thinking was that if he decided not to go on to law school for whatever reason, he would still have his CPA. He isn’t interested in engineering (unfortunately) or physics, etc. He loves history, but it’s a wasted degree alone.
This is absolutely wrong. A history degree, especially one that comes from a well-rounded, high quality liberal arts education can be immensely useful and attractive to a wide range of employers.
Anywhere that critical thinking ability and sharp skills in writing and other forms of communication are desired. The list of possible jobs is practically endless. If you are pigeon holing a history degree holder into a job as a history teacher (or something else so limited), you are woefully ignorant about higher education. And I don’t mean to be rude.
No, actually I wasn’t. But frankly, I’ve read time and time again that an undergrad history degree is worthless. I want my son to be able to support himself when he graduates. I anticipate he will follow through with law school, but maybe he won’t. So I have to ensure that he is making good choices now. That does not make me woefully ignorant. Good grief. I regret posting here. I was looking for help, not to be critiqued and criticized.
A history degree earned from a reputable college would be an excellent foundation for a law school application (among many other things). I try not to be judgmental, but if I were ever to hear someone say that an undergrad history degree is worthless, it would be hard for me not to have an immediate reaction that this person has no idea what they are talking about.
You may read it on the internet (even time and again), but that doesn’t mean it should end your willingness to consider other points of view.
And my point, as I’ve stated several times, is my fear of spending $120,000 - $160,000 on an undergrad degree, only to have DS decide not to go on. If I knew 100% that my son would go on to law school, then there would be no question, I would encourage history. I’m quite sure he would be thrilled to study history. DS excels in writing and communication in general and I am certain he will thrive in law school. But… what if? If college such a huge investment for my family, I would be happy to allow him the benefit of exploration. I have to ensure that when my DS graduates, he has something solid. Circumstances change, and I don’t know if he will want or have the ability to continue his education. We will only assume 4 years. After that, he’s on his own. If he came out of a 4 year school with a degree in History, I am certain, in Chicago, he would have a difficult time finding a job and making ends meet.
@BelknapPoint ^ From Marquette? From Western Michigan? I doubt it. Yes, if you get a history from a top 10 LAC or Top 20 National University - and are a great student, you have a chance at Goldman. Not some much for us regular folks.
@VH2018
The schools can say they don’t rank, but they do, they just don’t tell the kids. My daughter’s high school in NJ is huge and “didn’t rank” the 750 kids in her class of 2016… Yet the guidance counselor was able to input a rank into scholarship applications just fine. In fact, my daughter learned her rank :0 so it is just an expression, it isn’t genuine.
The school ranks, they just don’t release it to the students the way my Alma mater did - we were in line for high school graduation by rank for the top 25, then by height.
@blossom I am really, really, really sorry. I didn’t mean it in the way that I obviously stated it. To me, it is wasteful unless it accompanies a 2nd major and/or law school, MBA, PHD, or from an Ivy league school. I came here looking for some good advice. Instead, I’ve been bashed for trying to steer my DS to a solid degree and called ignorant because I cannot appreciate an undergrad in history. And, in reaching out to another member here in a private message (which was my main purpose for joining), I was told that my DS’s SAT1390/ACT 30 is “low.” Admittedly, it’s not tippy top, but it isn’t “low” either. I’ve spent tens of thousands a year in property taxes to keep my kids in this high school, and he’s done quite well. I come to this site for a little guidance and this is what I got. At this point, I’m a bit emotional about it as this process, in general, is overwhelming. Please know that I am sorry for everyone I have offended and I will not post again. Thank you.
As someone with a B.S. in finance, I wish I had been advised to major in accounting. Your son will graduate with marketable skills. Writing and critical thinking skills can be refined by taking writing and history classes as electives. Best of luck!
Bear in mind that most states have adopted the 150 hour requirement for CPAs. It’s possible there’s a state with no experience requirement, but I’m not aware of any. So he’d be looking at 5 years of college plus a year or two of work before he’d be a CPA.
That said, there is enormous demand for newly minted CPA-eligible employees at the moment, and relatively little demand for newly minted attorneys other than those who would have considered a 30 ACT to be low. Assuming he has the ability and inclination, being a CPA is a good backup plan.
Surely you can see that the issue here specifically with an employer like Goldman Sachs is not what the major is but rather what the degree granting institution is. A history major who has done well at any school should bring to the table the ability to analyze information, think critically, solve problems and communicate well with a wide range of other people.
History, like many of the traditional “liberal arts” majors, doesn’t just teach you when and where things happened, but most importantly why.
Getting a bachelor’s degree shouldn’t be a four year trade school, except for a small number of professions. A history major will probably only take about a third of his or her courses in the declared major. What are the other courses for, then? To be well-rounded, to be exposed to other subjects and ideas, to become a more productive and better informed person.
The thought that someone would be pushed into a particular are of study because of its perceived attractiveness to employers is unfortunate. What if the student doesn’t like that area, but feels pressure keep doing it? Grades, among other things, will probably suffer. Students should be encouraged to study what appeals to them, based on their interests and abilities.
